What is new replaces the old.

There is a misunderstanding, adopted from the traditional cultures, insisting that what is old is superior to what is new. Logic does not subscribe to that conclusion, whatsoever. The old may have been superior in those olden days, but what is new becomes superior to that which is old. This is like a pair of shoes, bought two years back. Having been using them for those two years, they continue to lose value, until one throws them away. The time to discard them may be exactly at the point of purchasing the new pair.

Nature demands that the new replaces the old, not the other way round. The laws of nature provide this as a simple rule, observed in living things, whether plants, animals, or humans. The greatest cognition in this life ought to be appreciated in that physical things come and go. It doesn’t matter whether one would be most senior at his workplace or being a most revered politician. Apparently, even the inanimate objects obey the principle of start, change, and stop.

The late former president, Robert Mugabe, failed to appreciate that reality. Although, possible that he may have co-existed among friends who avoided making him aware of such realities. This is just as all Kingdoms come to exist before they become no more. Nothing physical lives forever, except that which would be spiritual, according to the Biblical evidence.

The physical universe is based on the principle of start, change, and stop. What starts, changes and stops is not life, necessarily, which does not end. If I pick up a stone, throwing it afar, that stone goes as far as my energy propels it. It is the life energy in me that causes the stone to change its position, thereby, landing elsewhere.

I would have become the cause of the movement of that stone, to change its locational position. Those having seen the stone in its previous position would then find it no longer there, as having changed its locational position. Any person can cause anything to disappear. This would be dependent upon whoever caused the disappearance of that object. These are obvious things, but not so obvious to those who could be intellectually challenged.

There is an interesting Biblical account, about the Prophet Elijah, concerning the chariot, causing his disappearance (2 Kings 2:1-14). Nothing is miraculous about that incident, although most people get fascinated about it. When Elijah’s time was up, God decided to replace him with Elisha. As a human, Elisha could not hold on to that position, forever. Apparently, all the prophets of old are no longer there, including Moses and Jesus, Himself.

How to get back to an old layout of images? - Google Search Community

Anything in the physical universe, though here today, would be no longer there in the future. Everything written here, though observed now, may not be there in the near future. Unless there would be something of eternal value in them, transcending the principle of start, change, and stop. I may not be available to have an impact on those living then. But, if of spiritual value, as inspired by God, the material on this website lives forever.

Otherwise, nothing can be trusted to stand for eternity, in the physical universe. In their limited finite observations, humans are often fearful of physical things. But there is nothing physical that should be feared by those created in God’s image. As such people hold eternal value. Those who understand the reality of infinity, as compared with material things, commit themselves, only to spiritual matters, rather than physical things.

“Because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus and present us with you to himself. All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God. Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:14-18) (NIV).

Most people assumed that king Nebuchadnezzar could control life, rather than being controlled by life. Yet king Nebuchadnezzar reigned at the discretion of the Almighty God, whose control of humans is premised only on His determined timing factor. God is the one controlling kingdoms all over the world. God sought to show Nebuchadnezzar His infinity and sovereignty, for the purpose of us today and the entire humanity.

“He (Nebuchadnezzar) said, ‘Is not this the great Babylon I have built as the royal residence, by my mighty power and for the glory of my majesty?’ Even as the words were on his lips, a voice came from heaven, ‘This is what is decreed for you, King Nebuchadnezzar: Your royal authority has been taken from you. You will be driven away from people and will live with the wild animals; you will eat grass like the ox. Seven times will pass by for you until you acknowledge that the Most High is sovereign over all kingdoms on earth and gives them to anyone he wishes.’ Immediately what had been said about Nebuchadnezzar was fulfilled. He was driven away from people and ate grass like the ox. His body was drenched with the dew of heaven until his hair grew like the feathers of an eagle and his nails like the claws of a bird” Daniel 4:30-33) (NIV).

The physical universe is controlled by the principle of start, change, and stop. In as much as the boastful king assumed to live forever, he could not outwit the one controlling his life. The life of any individual goes as far as God decides to stretch it. In their limited ways, humans, like God, can start, change, and stop objects. The most logical thing is to appreciate the fact that, what is new replaces the old, not the other way round. But, nothing exists without having been caused to exist.

Only the insane assume that from the state of being old, it is possible to replace the new. Where such a scenario exists, we have a description of confusion or irregularity. The son could die prematurely, for the father to take over the inheritance of the son. Otherwise, nature dictates that the old man dies first, living the son to take over the inheritance.

Our Zimbabwean situation criminalizes the younger generation for demanding power at the expense of the older generation. This is a result of a paternalistic society, also causing women to be treated unfairly. What causes this is greed, more than desiring to improve the wellbeing of the general populace. The future will bemoan the brunt of the sins of those refusing to deal with this evil. What the twenty-first century requires is the younger generation. Unfortunately, the generality of our youths seems sold to the paternalistic viewpoint.

What is new is superior to the old. When replacing the old with the new there is no need to copy the old, although some ideas could be applicable to the new. What should be kept in mind is that what is new requires nothing of the old. Only that which carries the spiritual value carries what is eternal. Old ideas need to be discarded, as soon as new ideas arrive.

The electric train innovations do not require the retention of steam engine locomotives, except for archival purposes. Of course, the person who invented the steam engine was a genius, as to be credited for his work, during his time. But the steam engine locomotives long ceased to carry any value. The engineers of such innovations became archaic, as unusable anywhere, but they were very important, during their time.

Their usefulness became limited to issues of dedication to service, rather than their ingenuity. It is not cruel for the younger generations to dispose of older generational ideas. G40 is dreaded by war veterans who fought the war of liberation. Yet their survival ought to be sustained by their willingness to relinquish their usefulness, for the younger generation to take over.

Without ruthlessly discarding the war veterans’ ideas, the sustainable survival for the populace, including those war vets cannot be achievable. Nothing of old needs to be treated with honor, accept, respectfully, looking after those war veterans in their old age. The wrong thing is to adopt the methods used during the armed struggle, as if sacrosanct.

Not many war veterans can appreciate the things of the twenty-first century. There is nothing to be apologetic about when bringing up the idea of G40, for instance. If whoever, brought the idea about G40 had value, such a proponent ought to be encouraged to seriously encourage youths to resurrect it sooner than later. The wrong thing would be applying the mentality of the war vets in the armed struggle.

The only thing to consider, when promoting the G40 ideas, is the issue of survival. If ZANU PF has good supporters, they should be sustained in the G40, rather than the cultish mentality of treating ZANU PF as a god. Those G40 members can effectively compete with the properly constituted MDC. Otherwise, the talk of political reforms is a waste of time.

There is no value in talking about change, when not willing to throw away old ideas. The ruling class in ZANU PF belongs to the dust bin. The G40, whose derivation suggests empowering the youths, for the country’s survival, is noble. The younger generation ought to be allowed to take up leadership, sooner than later. The dark side of our war veterans remains in violently opposing such suggestions.

The fear is sustained in the assumption that the younger generation would take the country back to the colonizers. But, whatever is feared wins at the end. That is why they are found begging those colonizers to come and invest, yet having fought against them. For instance, Ian Smith feared Mugabe, on hearing Mugabe’s insistence of introducing a Marxist state in this country. Smith’s fear is exactly what caused Mugabe to win in 1980. This does not suggest that Marxism was the right philosophy to pursue. After all, Mugabe was never a Marxist, at all.

Mugabe turned out to be a true friend of the West, rather than applying his Marxism, rhetoric. The rhetoric was to be invoked, only when convenient, as a means of keeping himself in power. That tactic sustained him for approximately forty years. What one fears is what one eventually succumbs to. By warning the populace against Mugabe, Smith, actually, promoted Mugabe.

The reason why MDC could not out-rightly defeat ZANU PF was the fear of the war veterans. The MDC party appeared as so scared of being labeled sellouts, to the point of succumbing to the idea of the destructive land reform program. They could not match the propaganda machinery of Professor Jonathan Moyo, at that time, thereby losing focus.

There was no need for MDC to be apologetic about what they knew to be pro-survival. This is just as the G40 cannot raise their heads, if what they really meant about G40 was pro-survival. Apparently, the G40 idea now appears as having just been a ruse, not intended to be applied, as a philosophy. Yet this could have long had an impact, encouraging the youths to become aware of their political responsibility.

The war veterans and those supporting them were known to butcher those opposing them. But that was the proof of how wrong they were. The pariah state of our country is the only proof of wrongness with such behavior. I am not sure whether Khuphe and her friends are happy people? As long as dictated by anger, they are to be avoided as measles. The same applies to MDCA, as long as angered by the Supreme Court judgment.

Nothing good comes from an angry person. But, those fearing angry people, can easily be assured of succumbing to such angry people. What one hates or fears, is what wins at the end. But when standing for what is right, keeping one’s dignity intact, it is always the angry ones who eventually succumb. The logical reason remains supreme, over everything, especially being the only method that defeats anger. What Jesus insisted, of giving the other chick, works.

Nevertheless, what is new should be treated as superior to what is old. There is no need to be apologetic about that. For those desiring to know where the truth lies, anger is the only indicator, showing how wrong the advocate of any philosophy would be. Whatever would be wrong, can be judged by how angry the advocate would be. Yet such an advocate would always be without the convincing facts.

Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilization, laying down standards for uplifting Zimbabwe from the current state of economic depression into a model for other nations worldwide. A decaying tree provides an opportunity for a blossoming sprout. Written from a Christian perspective, the book is a product of inspiration, bringing relief to those having witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions––leading to the current economic and social decay. In a simple conversational tone, most Zimbabweans should find the book as a long-awaited providential oasis of hope.

The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99

Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com  for $6.99